The Supreme Court had on November 9 unanimously ruled that the land belongs to Hindus and handed it to the Ram Lalla, one of the three petitioners in the case. The court in its order directed the central government to provide five acres of land to Muslims in Ayodhya for the construction of a mosque.
The Hindu Mahasabha, a right-wing organisation, will file a review petition in the Supreme Court contesting its November 9 decision to grant 5 acres of land to the Muslim side to construct a mosque in the Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute case. The outfit has been arguing that there is no reason for the court to allow an alternative land to the Muslim side. Vishnu Jain, lawyer of the Hindu Mahasabha, said that the top court in its ruling clearly stated that both the inside and outside courtyard of the 2.77 acres of land in Ayodhya belongs to the Hindus and therefore, it was meaningless to order the central government to provide an alternative land for the construction of a mosque in the town.
“We will file review petition today challenging the Supreme Court decision of granting five acres of land to the Muslim side on another site at Ayodhya or anywhere the Board finds it suitable, in the Ayodhya Babri Masjid land dispute case,” he said.
This will be the seventh review petition against the Supreme Court’s historic verdict in the decades-old case. The Constitution bench of the Supreme Court had on November 9 unanimously ruled that the land belongs to Hindus and handed it to the Ram Lalla, one of the three petitioners in the case. The court in its order directed the central government to provide five acres of land to Muslims in Ayodhya for the construction of a mosque.
The five pleas have been filed by Maulana Mufti Hasbullah, Moulana Mahfoozur Rehman, Mishbahuddin, Mohd Umar and Haji Mahboob, all backed by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). The sixth petition has been filed by Mohammad Ayub. All have challenged the court’s decision to hand over the land to Ram Lalla.
The Uttar Pradesh Sunni Waqf Central Board, the main petitioner in the case, however, has not challenged the top court’s decision. The board is yet to decide whether to accept the five acres land or not.